Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it!

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it!
Date: 2010-02-09 16:14:38
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
Due to an error during an update to the system kernel on a database
server backing a web application, we ran for a month (mid-December
to mid-January) with the WAL files in the pg_xlog subdirectory on
the same 40-spindle array as the data -- only the OS was on a
separate mirrored pair of drives.  When we found the problem, we
moved the pg_xlog directory back to its own mirrored pair of drives
and symlinked to it.  It's a pretty dramatic difference.
Graph attached, this is response time for a URL request (like what a
user from the Internet would issue) which runs 15 queries and
formats the results.  Response time is 85 ms without putting WAL on
its own RAID; 50 ms with it on its own RAID.  This is a real-world,
production web site with 1.3 TB data, millions of hits per day, and
it's an active replication target 24/7.
Frankly, I was quite surprised by this, since some of the benchmarks
people have published on the effects of using a separate RAID for
the WAL files have only shown a one or two percent difference when
using a hardware RAID controller with BBU cache configured for
No assistance needed; just posting a performance data point.

Attachment: webresponse.png
Description: image/png (4.1 KB) (inlined above)


pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Jesper KroghDate: 2010-02-09 16:22:51
Subject: Re: moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it!
Previous:From: Albe LaurenzDate: 2010-02-09 15:22:50
Subject: Re: foreign key constraint lock behavour in postgresql

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group